ABSTRACT
Clinical risk scores based on traditional risk factors of atherosclerosis correlate imprecisely to an individual's complex pathophysiological predisposition to atherosclerosis and provide limited accuracy for predicting major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Over the past two decades, computed tomography scanners and techniques for coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) analysis have substantially improved, enabling more precise atherosclerotic plaque quantification and characterization. The accuracy of CCTA for quantifying stenosis and atherosclerosis has been validated in numerous multicentre studies and has shown consistent incremental prognostic value for MACE over the clinical risk spectrum in different populations. Serial CCTA studies have advanced our understanding of vascular biology and atherosclerotic disease progression. The direct disease visualization of CCTA has the potential to be used synergistically with indirect markers of risk to significantly improve prevention of MACE, pending large-scale randomized evaluation.
Subject(s)
Computed Tomography Angiography , Coronary Angiography , Coronary Artery Disease , Humans , Computed Tomography Angiography/methods , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnosis , Risk Assessment/methods , Coronary Angiography/methods , Plaque, Atherosclerotic/diagnostic imaging , Heart Disease Risk Factors , Prognosis , Coronary Stenosis/diagnostic imagingABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Diabetes-related multi-morbidity and cultural factors place Latinas with diabetes at increased risk for stress, which can threaten illness management. Families provide an ideal focus for interventions that seek to strengthen interpersonal resources for illness management and, in the process, to reduce stress. The current study sought to examine whether participating in a dyadic intervention was associated with reduced perceived stress and, furthermore, whether this association was mediated by persuasion and pressure, two forms of health-related social control. METHOD: Latina mothers with diabetes and their at-risk adult daughters participated in either (1) a dyadic intervention that encouraged constructive collaboration to improve health behaviors and reduce stress, or (2) a usual-care minimal control condition. Actor-partner interdependence model analysis was used to estimate the effect of the intervention on dyads' perceived stress, and mother-daughter ratings of health-related social control as potential mediators. RESULTS: Results revealed that participating in the intervention was associated with significantly reduced perceived stress for daughters, but not for mothers (ß = - 3.00, p = 0.02; ß = - 0.57, p = 0.67, respectively). Analyses also indicated that the association between the intervention and perceived stress was mediated by persuasion, such that mothers' who experienced more health-related persuasion exhibited significantly less post-intervention perceived stress (indirect effect = - 1.52, 95% CI = [- 3.12, - 0.39]). Pressure exerted by others, however, did not evidence a mediating mechanism for either mothers or daughters. CONCLUSION: These findings buttress existing research suggesting that persuasion, or others' attempts to increase participants' healthy behaviors in an uncritical way, may be a driving force in reducing perceived stress levels.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Mothers , Adult , Female , Humans , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/complications , Adult Children , Mother-Child Relations , Hispanic or Latino , Stress, PsychologicalABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Limited guidance exists regarding implementation strategies that best facilitate cancer screening practice substitution and achieve optimal stakeholder-centered outcomes. Here we describe the protocol for a randomized pragmatic trial comparing two implementation strategies to facilitate substitution of primary HPV screening for Pap and HPV co-testing to perform routine cervical cancer screening of women aged 30-65 years at Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC). METHODS: Twelve service areas within KPSC will be randomized to a "centrally-administered system-wide implementation + local-tailored implementation" strategy or a "centrally-administered system-wide implementation only" strategy. The centrally-administered strategy comprises clinician and staff educational activities. Sites in the local-tailored arm will then conduct a structured local needs assessment followed by site-specific selection and deployment of implementation interventions. Surveys and interviews will be conducted among women and providers from the primary care and ob/gyn departments prior to the system-wide transition, shortly after the transition, and after the completion of local-tailored interventions. A stakeholder advisory committee will assist with study design, defining stakeholder-centered outcomes, and developing data collection tools. RESULTS: The primary outcome of interest is uptake of primary HPV screening. Secondary provider-centered outcomes include provider knowledge, delivery of patient education, satisfaction with the practice substitution process, and resistance to primary HPV screening. Secondary patient-centered outcomes include patient knowledge, stigma, and satisfaction with the screening process. Intervention fidelity will also be measured via surveys. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study will help inform future use of a local-tailored implementation strategy for adopting primary HPV screening at large health care systems. Findings may also be applicable to other types of practice substitution.
Subject(s)
Papillomavirus Infections , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms , Female , Humans , Delivery of Health Care , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Mass Screening , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Pragmatic Clinical Trials as TopicSubject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Ethnicity , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnosis , Humans , Mass Screening , Racial Groups , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) issues "Insufficient Evidence" (I) statements when scientific evidence is inadequate for making recommendations about clinical preventive services. Insufficient Evidence statements may be changed to definitive recommendations if new research closes evidence gaps. This study examines the characteristics of evidence that informed changes from I statements to definitive recommendations, including NIH's role as a funder. METHODS: A total of 11 USPSTF Insufficient Evidence statements that were changed between 2010 and 2019 were assessed. Study designs, bibliometric influence, and funding sources for scientific articles cited in USPSTF evidence reviews were characterized for each I statement. Data were analyzed in 2019-2020. RESULTS: Most I statements (82%) changed to a B grade; an average of 8.4 years elapsed between issuing the I statement and releasing the definitive recommendation. An average of 63 (range=19-253) articles were included in each USPSTF evidence review. NIH support was cited in 28.8% of articles, on average. The proportion of NIH-funded articles reporting RCT designs was similar to that of non-NIH-funded articles (64.5% vs 59.5%). A higher proportion of NIH-funded articles were rated good quality for study design (39.0%) than the proportion of non-NIH-funded articles (24.4%). Bibliometric influence measured by relative citation ratios was higher for NIH-funded (mean=14.78) than for non-NIH-funded (mean=5.07) articles. CONCLUSIONS: Study designs and funding supports varied widely across topics, but overall, NIH was the largest single funder of evidence informing 11 changed USPSTF I statements. Enhanced efforts by NIH and other stakeholders to address I statement evidence gaps are needed.
Subject(s)
Advisory Committees , Preventive Health Services , HumansABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: New cervical cancer screening guidelines recommend primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing for women age 30-65 years. Healthcare organizations are preparing to de-implement the previous recommended strategies of Pap testing or co-testing (Pap plus HPV test) and substitute primary HPV testing. However, there may be significant challenges to the replacement of this entrenched clinical practice, even with an evidence-based substitution. We sought to identify stakeholder-perceived barriers and facilitators to this substitution within a large healthcare system, Kaiser Permanente Southern California. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with clinician, administrative, and patient stakeholders regarding (a) acceptability and feasibility of the planned substitution; (b) perceptions of barriers and facilitators, with an emphasis on those related to the de-implementation/implementation cycle of substitution; and (c) perceived readiness to change. Our interview guide was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Using a team coding approach, we developed an initial coding structure refined during iterative analysis; the data were subsequently organized thematically into domains, key themes, and sub-themes using thematic analysis, followed by framework analysis informed by CFIR. RESULTS: We conducted 23 interviews: 5 patient and 18 clinical/administrative. Clinicians perceived that patients feel more tests equals better care, and clinicians and patients expressed fear of missed cancers (" it'll be more challenging convincing the patient that only one test is good enough to detect cancer."). Patients perceived practice changes resulting in "less care" are driven by the desire to cut costs. In contrast, clinicians/administrators viewed changing from two tests to one as acceptable and a workflow efficiency (" It's very easy and half the work."). Stakeholder-recommended strategies included focusing on the increased efficacy of primary HPV testing and developing clinician talking points incorporating national guidelines to assuage "cost-cutting" fears. CONCLUSIONS: Substitution to replace an entrenched clinical practice is complex. Leveraging available facilitators is key to ease the process for clinical and administrative stakeholders-e.g., emphasizing the efficiency of going from two tests to one. Identifying and addressing clinician and patient fears regarding cost-cutting and perceived poorer quality of care is critical for substitution. Multicomponent and multilevel strategies for engagement and education will be required. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, # NCT04371887.
ABSTRACT
IMPORTANCE: In its mission to improve health, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recognizes the strong relationship between a person's health and social and economic circumstances as well as persistent inequities in health care delivery. OBJECTIVE: To assess how social risks have been considered in USPSTF recommendation statements and identify current gaps in evidence needed to expand the systematic inclusion of social risks in future recommendations. EVIDENCE: The USPSTF commissioned a technical brief that reviewed existing literature on screening and interventions for social risk factors and also audited the 85 USPSTF recommendation statements active as of December 2019 to determine how social risks were addressed in clinical preventive services recommendations. FINDINGS: Among the 85 USPSTF recommendation statements reviewed, 14 were focused on preventive services that considered health-related social risks. Social risks were commonly referenced in parts of USPSTF recommendations, with 57 of 85 recommendations including some comment on social risks within the recommendation statement, although many comments were not separate prevention services. Social risks were commented on in USPSTF recommendations as part of risk assessment, as a marker of worse health outcomes from the condition of focus, as a consideration for clinicians when implementing the preventive service, and as a research need or gap on the topic. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This report identified how social risks have been considered in the USPSTF recommendation statements. It serves as a benchmark and foundation for ongoing work to advance the goal of ensuring that health equity and social risks are incorporated in USPSTF methods and recommendations.
Subject(s)
Preventive Health Services , Primary Health Care , Social Determinants of Health , Advisory Committees , Food Insecurity , Guidelines as Topic , Housing , Humans , Risk Factors , Socioeconomic Factors , United StatesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Although informal caregivers such as family and friends provide people with cancer needed physical care and emotional support, little is known about which individuals have access to such caregivers. The purpose of this article is to provide a nationally representative description of the sociodemographic characteristics of cancer survivors who have or had an informal caregiver in the United States. METHODS: Cross-sectional data were taken from the Experiences With Cancer Survivorship Supplement of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey in 2011, 2016, and 2017. People were cancer survivors from diagnosis until the end of life. The study population consisted of adult survivors of cancer other than nonmelanoma skin cancer who were treated for cancer less than 3 years before the survey and were living in the community (n = 720). The main outcome measure was whether or not the cancer survivor reported having an informal caregiver. RESULTS: In the United States, 55.2% of cancer survivors reported having an informal caregiver during or after their cancer treatment. The relationship of the caregiver to the survivor varied by sex: males were more likely to have a spouse as their caregiver, and females were more likely to have a child as their caregiver. In multivariate analyses, cancer survivors who were female, were married, were of a race/ethnicity other than White, or were in poor health were more likely to have an informal caregiver. CONCLUSIONS: Future research can examine whether those without informal caregivers might need more formal support as they undergo cancer treatment and transition into cancer survivorship.
Subject(s)
Cancer Survivors , Neoplasms , Adult , Caregivers/psychology , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Neoplasms/therapy , Quality of Life/psychology , SurvivorsABSTRACT
On March 19, 2020, the governor of California issued a statewide stay-at-home order to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).* The order reduced accessibility to and patient attendance at outpatient medical visits, including preventive services such as cervical cancer screening. In-person clinic visits increased when California reopened essential businesses on June 12, 2020.§ Electronic medical records of approximately 1.5 million women served by Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC), a large integrated health care system, were examined to assess cervical cancer screening rates before, during, and after the stay-at-home order. KPSC policy is to screen women aged 21-29 years every 3 years with cervical cytology alone (Papanicolaou [Pap] test); those aged 30-65 years were screened every 5 years with human papillomavirus (HPV) testing and cytology (cotesting) through July 15, 2020, and after July 15, 2020, with HPV testing alone, consistent with the latest recommendations from U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.¶ Compared with the 2019 baseline, cervical cancer screening rates decreased substantially during the stay-at-home order. Among women aged 21-29 years, cervical cytology screening rates per 100 person-months declined 78%. Among women aged 30-65 years, HPV test screening rates per 100 person-months decreased 82%. After the stay-at-home order was lifted, screening rates returned to near baseline, which might have been aided by aspects of KPSC's integrated, organized screening program (e.g., reminder systems and tracking persons lost to follow-up). As the pandemic continues, groups at higher risk for developing cervical cancers and precancers should be evaluated first. Ensuring that women receive preventive services, including cancer screening and appropriate follow-up in a safe and timely manner, remains important.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated , Early Detection of Cancer/statistics & numerical data , Quarantine/legislation & jurisprudence , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/prevention & control , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , California/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Young AdultABSTRACT
The purpose of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is to provide evidence-based recommendations on primary care screening, behavioral counseling, and preventive medications. A person's health is strongly influenced by social determinants of health, such as economic and social conditions; therefore, preventive recommendations that address these determinants would be ideal. However, differing social determinants have been proposed by a wide range of agencies and organizations, little prevention evidence is available, and responsible parties are in competition, all of which make the creation of evidence-based prevention recommendations for social determinants of health challenging. This article highlights social determinants already included in USPSTF recommendations and proposes a process by which others may be considered for primary care preventive recommendations. In many ways, incorporating social determinants of health into evidence-based recommendations is an evolving area. By reviewing the evidence on the effects of screening and interventions on social determinants relevant to primary care, the USPSTF will continue to provide recommendations on clinical preventive services to improve the health of all Americans.
Subject(s)
Preventive Health Services/standards , Primary Health Care/standards , Social Determinants of Health/standards , Advisory Committees , Biomedical Research , Humans , Mass Screening/standards , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Assessment/standards , United StatesABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is the largest integrated health care system in the United States. To date, there has been scant research on how VHA adopts clinical preventive services guidelines and how U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations factor into the process. METHODS: Researchers conducted semistructured interviews with eight VHA leaders to examine how they adopt, disseminate, and measure adherence to recommendations. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and aggregated into a database to enable sorting and synthesis. Themes were identified across the key informant interviews. RESULTS: The development of VHA clinical prevention guidelines is coordinated by the National Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention. A VHA Advisory Committee discusses and votes to approve or disapprove each guideline. Several factors can impact the ability of a veterans affairs medical center to implement a guideline, such as local system capacity and priorities for quality improvement. Methods to promote implementation include electronic reminders, educational events, and a robust performance measurement system. CONCLUSIONS: Provision of evidence-based clinical preventive services is an important part of VHA's effort to provide high-quality care for Veterans. Recent achievements in lung cancer, colorectal cancer, and Hepatitis C screening highlight VHA's successful approach to implementation of preventive services guidance.
Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care/standards , Evidence-Based Medicine/standards , Hospitals, Veterans/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Preventive Medicine/standards , Quality of Health Care/standards , United States Department of Veterans Affairs/standards , Veterans Health/standards , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , United StatesABSTRACT
Analysis of a nationally representative sample of adults with mental health needs shows that rural residents have fewer ambulatory mental health visits than their urban counterparts do. Even among people already on prescription medications for mental health conditions, rural-urban differences are large.
Subject(s)
Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Mental Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Rural Health Services , Female , Humans , Male , Psychiatry/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires , Urban Health ServicesABSTRACT
The body of research on social determinants of health is rapidly accumulating. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is conducting evaluations to consider the inclusion of screening and counseling for social risks as a clinical preventive service. Yet, for many social risks, evidence is still likely needed before the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force can recommend universal screening or counseling. This manuscript offers a brief review of the social determinants of health that may be germane to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, the methods the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force uses to evaluate relevant evidence, and current evidence gaps for social risks. Key methods for making clinical preventive service recommendations are applied for considering the integration of social and clinical care. These methods include determining the certainty of the evidence, assessing the net benefit, defining appropriate prevention frameworks, defining health outcomes versus intermediate outcomes, fully assessing the harms, and defining to what populations and care contexts the evidence applies. This road map for research is intended to spark ingenuity and purpose in the next generation of research studies, thereby ensuring that future recommendations to address and prevent social risks in primary care are informed by high-quality evidence. SUPPLEMENT INFORMATION: This article is part of a supplement entitled Identifying and Intervening on Social Needs in Clinical Settings: Evidence and Evidence Gaps, which is sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Kaiser Permanente, and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Subject(s)
Advisory Committees/standards , Preventive Health Services/standards , Research Design , Social Determinants of Health , Evidence-Based Medicine , Humans , Preventive Health Services/organization & administration , United StatesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) remains the leading cause of mortality in the United States. The purpose of this study is to examine the rates of statin use for secondary prevention of ASCVD events in the United States over the last decade and determine whether disparities in the treatment of ASCVD still persist among women and racial/ethnic minorities. METHODS: We conducted a trend analysis using data from 2008 through 2016 to describe age-adjusted trends in the use of statins for secondary prevention using the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. We also conducted a multivariable logistic regression analysis to determine whether sociodemographic characteristics are associated with statin use during the 3 years that followed the publication of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guideline (2014 through 2016). RESULTS: The prevalence of statin use among those with a history of ASCVD remained unchanged from 2008 through 2016. In 2014 to 2016, more than 40% of those aged 40 years and older with a history of ASCVD did not use statins, corresponding to approximately 9.5 million Americans. Increasing age and having been diagnosed with high cholesterol (odds ratio [OR], 6.22; P < .001) were associated with higher odds of statin use while being female (OR, 0.65; P < .001) or Hispanic (OR, 0.69; P = .011) were associated with lower odds of statin use. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found there was no increase in the national rates of statin use following the ACC/AHA 2013 secondary prevention guideline and the availability of generic statins. Significant gender and ethnic disparities in ASCVD treatment remained in the United States.
Subject(s)
Atherosclerosis/prevention & control , Drugs, Generic/therapeutic use , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Secondary Prevention/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , American Heart Association , Atherosclerosis/epidemiology , Cardiology/standards , Drugs, Generic/standards , Female , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Healthcare Disparities/trends , Humans , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/standards , Male , Middle Aged , Minority Groups/statistics & numerical data , Secondary Prevention/standards , Secondary Prevention/trends , Sex Factors , Socioeconomic Factors , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Millions of traumatized refugees worldwide have resettled in the United States. For one of the largest, the Cambodian community, having their mental health needs met has been a continuing challenge. A multicomponent health information technology screening tool was designed to aid provider recognition and treatment of major depressive disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in the primary care setting. METHODS: In a clustered randomized controlled trial, 18 primary care providers were randomized to receive access to a multicomponent health information technology mental health screening intervention, or to a minimal intervention control group; 390 Cambodian American patients empaneled to participating providers were assigned to the providers' randomized group. RESULTS: Electronic screening revealed that 65% of patients screened positive for depression and 34% screened positive for PTSD. Multilevel mixed effects logistic models, accounting for clustering structure, indicated that providers in the intervention were more likely to diagnose depression [odds ratio (OR), 6.5; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.48-28.79; P=0.013] and PTSD (OR, 23.3; 95% CI, 2.99-151.62; P=0.002) among those diagnosed during screening, relative to the control group. Providers in the intervention were more likely to provide evidence-based guideline (OR, 4.02; 95% CI, 1.01-16.06; P=0.049) and trauma-informed (OR, 15.8; 95% CI, 3.47-71.6; P<0.001) care in unadjusted models, relative to the control group. Guideline care, but not trauma-informed care, was associated with decreased depression at 12 weeks in both study groups (P=0.003), and neither was associated with PTSD outcomes at 12 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: This innovative approach offers the potential for training primary care providers to diagnose and treat traumatized patients, the majority of whom seek mental health care in primary care (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03191929).
Subject(s)
Depressive Disorder, Major/diagnosis , Health Personnel/education , Mass Screening , Medical Informatics , Primary Health Care , Refugees/statistics & numerical data , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/diagnosis , Adult , Cambodia , Culturally Competent Care , Depressive Disorder, Major/therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/therapy , United StatesABSTRACT
Tobacco use, lack of physical activity and poor diet, and alcohol consumption are leading causes of death in the United States. We estimated screening and counseling rates by using a nationally representative sample of adults aged 35 years and older with a preventive care supplement to the 2014 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Receipt of the recommended level of services ranged from nearly two-thirds (64.2% for obesity, 61.9% for tobacco use) to less than one-half (41.0% for alcohol misuse). There is significant room for improving care delivery, but primary care practices probably also need additional resources to raise screening and counseling rates.
Subject(s)
Alcoholism/diagnosis , Obesity/diagnosis , Professional Practice Gaps , Tobacco Use/prevention & control , Alcoholism/therapy , Counseling , Humans , Mass Screening , Obesity/therapy , Smoking Cessation , Tobacco Use/therapySubject(s)
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Adult , Aged , Early Detection of Cancer/standards , Female , Humans , Mass Screening , Middle Aged , Papanicolaou Test/standards , Papillomaviridae/isolation & purification , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Practice Guidelines as TopicABSTRACT
Asian Americans are understudied in health research and often aggregated into one homogenous group, thereby disguising disparities across subgroups. Cambodian Americans, one of the largest refugee communities in the United States, may be at high risk for adverse health outcomes. This study compares the health status and healthcare experiences of Cambodian American refugees and immigrants. Data were collected via questionnaires and medical records from two community clinics in Southern California (n = 308). Chi square and t-tests examined the socio-demographic differences between immigrants and refugees, and ANCOVA models compared the mean differences in responses for each outcome, adjusting for age at immigration, education level, and clinic site. Cambodian American refugees reported overall lower levels of health-related quality of life (all p's < 0.05 in unadjusted models) and self-rated health [unadjusted means (SD) = 18.2 (16.8) vs. 21.7 (13.7), p < 0.05], but either similar or more positive healthcare experiences than Cambodian American immigrants. In adjusted analyses, refugees had higher rates of diabetes and cardiovascular disease risk (e.g. heart condition and hypertension; p's < 0.05) compared to Cambodian American immigrants. There were minimal differences in self-reported health behaviors between the two groups. There is a need for more health promotion efforts among Cambodian American refugees and immigrants to improve their health outcomes and perceived wellbeing.